Posted on 11/25/2016 2:43:54 PM PST by doghorse
Can the petition for the recount be denied? I've been reading varying accounts, so am not sure. I think I read here on FR that the recount happens if the petitioner pays the $$. But, can a judge step in and deny the request before it moves forward?
LOSERS!
They asked for several counties. However, the state rules are a full recount.
*************
So will Stein then have enough money to pay for a FULL recount? She could come up short if that’s the case.
Looks like it’s a petition for full recount, by hand:
Jill Stein Verified Petition for Recount, 11/25/2016
I just looked at the county by county vs 2012
. The Milwaukee turnout is way down. Hillary isn’t Obama, and the blacks didn’t come out.
Stein raised more money for the recount than she did for her presidential campaign. Interesting fact.
It did work to change a governor in Washington state.
Not enough votes out of Milwaukee and Dane.
Hillary might pick up a few hundred votes there at the margins in a recount but not enough to change the outcome.
Her lawyers know this which is why her campaign didn’t file a recount request at closing time in WI today.
That can happen in an election where a few hundred votes separate the winner and the loser.
A margin of 27,000 votes is all but impossible to overcome.
It is the routine audit which has begun, not the recount.
The state hasn't yet determined the cost of the recount, the last recount conducted was several years ago and for a much smaller number of votes.
This recount could cost over twice as much as the last one and the requesting party might not yet have enough money to pay for it especially since the cost hasn't been established yet.
The recount can't even begin until the candidate pays the total cost of the recount.
The basis for requesting the recount. This can consist of a general statement that the petitioner believes that a mistake or fraud was committed in a specified ward or municipality in the counting and return of the votes cast for the office; or more specific grounds, such as a particular defect, irregularity, or illegality in the conduct of the election, may be listed in the petition. The petitioner shall state if this information is based on personal knowledge of the petitioner or if the petitioner believes the information to be true based on information received from other sources. Wis. Stat. § 9.01(1)(a)2.b.Stein alleges http://elections.wi.gov/sites/default/files/news/wisconsin_recount_petition_of_jill_stein_00268242_12391.pdf (excerpting):
3. The Petitioner is informed and believes that:Stein is correct that on October 7, 2016 the Department of Homeland Security and Office of the Director of National Intelligence did issue a Joint Statement on Election Security.a. In August 2016, it was widely reported that foreign operators breached voter registration databases in at least two states and stole hundreds of thousands of voter records.
b. Around that time, hackers infiltrated the e-mail systems of the Democratic National Committee and a campaign official for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton. These e-mails were then published online.
c. On October 7, 2016, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence on Election Security issued a joint statement regarding these breaches. The statement reads, in pertinent part, as follows: "The U.S. Intelligence Community (USIC) is confident" that there have been "recent compromises of e-mails from US persons and institutions, including from US political organizations." It also states that "[t]hese thefts and disclosures are intended to interfere with the US election process" and that "similar tactics and techniques [have been used] across Europe and Eurasia ... to influence public opinion there." In the statement, DHS urges state election officials "to be vigilant and seek cybersecurity assistance" from that agency in preparation for the presidential election.
https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/press-releases/215-press-releases-2016/1423-joint-dhs-odni-election-security-statement
However, the DNI-DHS statement does not claim there is evidence that Russia did in fact direct or conduct attacks, but that DNI & DHS believe attacks are "consistent with methods and motivations".
Methods and motivations are not proof of actions.
Did Russian intelligence hack the DNC? Perhaps. Perhaps not.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/19/politics/election-day-russia-hacking-explained/index.html
Or did someone click on spam and get sucked into ordinary cyber-crime?
http://www.salon.com/2016/10/21/hillary-clinton-campaign-chariman-john-podestas-email-was-hacked-because-he-clicked-on-a-phishing-link/
Returning to Stein's allegations:
e. In Wisconsin, there is evidence of voting irregularities in the 2016 presidential election that indicate potential tampering with electronic voting systems. Specifically, there was a significant increase in the number of absentee voters as compared to the last general election. This significant increase could be attributed to a breach of the state's electronic voter database.Stein's justification for recount is premised upon a collection of unsupported assertions and unproved allegations.f. The well-documented and conclusive evidence of foreign interference in the presidential race before the election, along with the irregularities observed in Wisconsin, call into question the results and indicate the possibility that widespread breach occurred.
Returning to Stein's allegations:
4. Attached as Exhibit 1, and incorporated fully herein, is the affidavit of J. Alex Halderman, Ph.D., a Professor of Computer Science and Engineering and the Director of the Center for Computer Security and Society at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor, Michigan, that details the basis for of my belief for the statements set forth in paragraph 3 above.In Exhibit 1 is stated that Illinois and Arizona voter registration systems were breached. An NBC news story is cited to support this claim. The NBC news story states that Illinois voter registration systems were breached and that attempts to breach Arizona's system failed.
Exhibit 16. The 2016 presidential election was subject to unprecedented cyberattacks apparently intended to interfere with the election. This summer, attackers broke into the email system of the Democratic National Committee and, separately, into the email account of John Podesta, the chairman of Secretary Clinton's campaign. Exhibits B and C. The attackers leaked private messages from both hacks. Attackers also infiltrated the voter registration systems of two states, Illinois and Arizona, and stole voter data. Exhibit D. The Department of Homeland Security has stated that senior officials in the Russian government commissioned these attacks. Exhibit E. Attackers attempted to breach election offices in more than 20 other states. Exhibit F.
In Exhibit 1 is stated "attackers broke into the email system of the Democratic National Committee and, separately, into the email account of John Podesta". As noted in the above linked Salon article the DNC has no evidence that Russian hackers were involved.
In Exhibit 1 is stated "The Department of Homeland Security has stated that senior officials in the Russian government commissioned these attacks." The joint DNI-DHS statement specifically states "we are not now in a position to attribute this activity to the Russian Government."
I could go on, but the point has been made. Stein's justification for recount is premised upon a collection hypothetical scenarios, unproved allegations, lies and puffery.
God DAMN Democrats are DUMB.
The Jill Stein web site is asking for people in ALL counties.
It's simple...not rocket science.
The recount is a waste of time, but they are building a narrative.
They’ve begun the process of asking for estimates... they asked for these estimates state-wide.
Personally, I’d like them to deny the request on the basis that even if Stein’s votes were undercounted by say...300%, it would not change the results of the election.
Just to be snarky, I also would like the recount to be only of her votes, not all votes.
“Good news, Ms. Stein! Instead of 20,000 votes, the recount has you at 23,456 votes.”
“And the others?”
“Oh, we didn’t count the others. $1.1 million only goes so far.”
Trump ignores this at his own risk. Maybe his advisers are not as trust worthy as he thinks and secretly working for the Never Trumpers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.